But to the extent that Romney is only delivering roundabout attacks like that, Obama can defend himself the same way. Romney talks about all the lost jobs, Obama talks about inheriting an economy in free fall and creating some large number since X date. If Romney wants to get something out of the debates, he needs to force something more than dueling stump speeches.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
PoliGAF 2012 |OT3| If it's not a legitimate OT the mods have ways to shut it down
- Thread starter pigeon
- Start date
- Status
But to the extent that Romney is only delivering roundabout attacks like that, Obama can defend himself the same way. Romney talks about all the lost jobs, Obama talks about inheriting an economy in free fall and creating some large number since X date. If Romney wants to get something out of the debates, he needs to force something more than dueling stump speeches.
Honestly, the ideal, probably impossible thing for Romney to do isn't to attack Obama, but to take 47% head on and explain it down to a safer position. He does not have a lot of room to do this. It would probably require him to sell out his donors or his base. But if he could effectively disavow it, he would benefit a lot.
you're supposing Mitt Romney's campaign has some form of competent strategy, pigeon
all kidding aside, i believe what I said is pretty much the only currently viable option for him. There's no way they are going to let their negatives rise any higher, no matter how unlikely it now is for him to win
all kidding aside, i believe what I said is pretty much the only currently viable option for him. There's no way they are going to let their negatives rise any higher, no matter how unlikely it now is for him to win
Byakuya769
Member
Why would the outcome be so different for Romney than it was McCain?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=axFKimTNejo
Team Obama is really good at campaign propaganda. Watching that makes you feel like you wanna be at one of those and get involved somehow lol. I wonder what reaction someone who hates Obama gets from watching that?
Team Obama is really good at campaign propaganda. Watching that makes you feel like you wanna be at one of those and get involved somehow lol. I wonder what reaction someone who hates Obama gets from watching that?
NullPointer
Member
I don't see how this is possible, much less in a debate forum.
Do you think we'll actually hear specifics for once? Specifics on Romney's plans to reform the tax code or reign in spending or, anything?
Black Mamba
Member
When is PD going to admit I was right?
Frank the Great
Banned
the race will tighten after the first debate. romney will do well and will improve his favorability numbers slightly.
not enough though. he needs something major to happen.
not enough though. he needs something major to happen.
The media will desperately talk him up even if he loses the debate. They need a close race
This was the theory going into the debates last time. And I do recall there being a lot of talk about how well McCain fared...right until the public polling about the debates started landing. I'm expecting the same this time around. In addition to not being very personable, Romney has an unpopular platform. I don't think he will do well.
Manmademan
Member
Not necessarily. The only thing the media loves more than a horse race is a trainwreck
Black Mamba
Member
Unskewed Polls has Obama winning in the latest Fox News Poll...after being unskewed!
lol
http://www.unskewedpolls.com/
Reuters +10 Romney, Fox News +2 Obama. And he really thinks what he's doing is accurate?
Maybe he will change his website to UnskewedVotes.com on Nov 7th
Oh man this is him?
Rarely does reality coincide with my imaginations.
http://www.businessinsider.com/unskewed-polling-dean-chambers-poll-bias-skewed-obama-romney-2012-9
lol
http://www.unskewedpolls.com/
Reuters +10 Romney, Fox News +2 Obama. And he really thinks what he's doing is accurate?
Maybe he will change his website to UnskewedVotes.com on Nov 7th
Oh man this is him?
Rarely does reality coincide with my imaginations.
http://www.businessinsider.com/unskewed-polling-dean-chambers-poll-bias-skewed-obama-romney-2012-9
Unskewed Polls has Obama winning in the latest Fox News Poll...after being unskewed!
lol
http://www.unskewedpolls.com/
Reuters +10 Romney, Fox News +2 Obama. And he really thinks what he's doing is accurate?
Maybe he will change his website to UnskewedVotes.com on Nov 7th
Oh man this is him?
Rarely does reality coincide with my imaginations.
http://www.businessinsider.com/unskewed-polling-dean-chambers-poll-bias-skewed-obama-romney-2012-9
Maybe it is a site run by The Onion covertly.
Fact is, debates these days are fluff, softball questions with almost no counter statements allowed and they don't allow all presidential nominees.
Romney is likely to have perceived as won since he will come off as competent at minimum and the individual bias in the media* actually works against Obama because he won't have made Romney cry. It will be an odd situation in which the media must confess that Romney did better than expected and Obama did what was expected. Therefore, Romney wins.
It doesn't matter that what is expected from Obama is greater than even the exceeded expectations of Romney.
*Be honest, the actual reporters are left leaning in general and they are in a live situation; a big reason that most media is moderate is that they are owned by major corporations and the editors answer to the managers who answer to the corporate board.
Romney is likely to have perceived as won since he will come off as competent at minimum and the individual bias in the media* actually works against Obama because he won't have made Romney cry. It will be an odd situation in which the media must confess that Romney did better than expected and Obama did what was expected. Therefore, Romney wins.
It doesn't matter that what is expected from Obama is greater than even the exceeded expectations of Romney.
*Be honest, the actual reporters are left leaning in general and they are in a live situation; a big reason that most media is moderate is that they are owned by major corporations and the editors answer to the managers who answer to the corporate board.
Aaron Sorkin, is that you?
Black Mamba
Member
wow, that is amazing. But "moderates" doesn't necessarily mean undecided. moderate could mean socially right democrat or socially left republican. Also, a self-described moderate may not be a swing voter and some self-described conservatives and liberals are swing voters. Plus, some cons are dems and visa-versa, oddly enough.
I consider myself a moderate but that was clearly an INT!
I consider myself a moderate but that was clearly an INT!
Arrowgigantic
Member
My prediction for the debates is that Romney gets in a hole so deep he has a dissociative fugue.
Aaron Strife
Banned
As Family Guy put it, undecided voters are some of the biggest idiots on the planet.
I'd love to meet the person who's honestly conflicted on voting for Obama or Romney, who isn't just at odds with one issue (e.g. "I really like Obama, but I'm also pro-life!").
Byakuya769
Member
And he's a douche. He is very irritable and does not do a good job of hiding it.
Aaron Strife
Banned
Yes, and he's running against Michele Bachmann!
I feel like there are no truly undecided voters, other than those conflicted over one issue. Maybe there are uninformed voters but that feels like a different thing altogether. I can't see a truly undecided voter this season, not when one candidate is so obviously better and the other resembles the Titanic.
September happened and the vast majority of people started to pay attention to the Election
Common sense tends to return during the Presidential Elections, of course all the gains will probably be shit on when nobody votes in 2014 and causes the same damn thing to happen as in 2010
It would probably be a nominal effect. There's scant evidence that debates significantly shift public opinion. And I would not expect this debate, barring a historic implosion exceeding comprehension, to yield an atypical outcome. That contradicts the conventional narrative, of course. But the conventional wisdom is often erroneous.
A murderous delirium.
PD owes it to the entire thread.
PhoenixDark
Banned
I'm confused. Right about what?
cartoon_soldier
Member
I will go out on a limb and say Romney will win the first debate.
I don't see how that is going out on a limb. Romney is well known to have done way more debate preparation than Obama.
I think Romney will 2 of the 3 debates. Obama will win foreign policy because Romney's trip during the Olympics was so embarrassing.
Ah that means nothing.Also we actually dont know what Obama has done ,all they been doing is lowering expectations like they suppose to.
I am not sure where this Romney debate confidence came from anyway.
This is what I've noticed. If he actually gets into debates, he won't handle it well. Which is why I think he'll mostly stick to talking points and planned remarks.
The final debates during the GOP candidacy race had Romney finally getting his act together and looking relatively strong.
Wasn't Romney an underdog in some of the Republican debates and delivered a very staid, stale performance while everyone else self-immolated?
What would ever lead you to believe that Romney has something in his back pocket to sway millions of voters? It's certainly not going to come from his campaign apparatus.
To paraphrase an old Celtics coach, '1980 Pat Buchanan ain't walking through that door'.
What would ever lead you to believe that Romney has something in his back pocket to sway millions of voters? It's certainly not going to come from his campaign apparatus.
To paraphrase an old Celtics coach, '1980 Pat Buchanan ain't walking through that door'.
I think he's going to spend 90 minutes trying to convince Americans that he really does have empathy, honest.
He can't keep doing this badly right? Surely he's going to go all out in the final stretch and improve at least somewhat.
Dr. Pangloss
Member
Romney is going to be perceived as the winner of the first debate barring any major gaffe. It will be the first time he has been elevated to that position and will appear right next to the president himself. That alone carries weight with some. As also mention the bar for Obama to clear will be higher than Romney's own. More is expected of the man in charge. The question we should be asking is he going to do something dramatic to shake the race up?
But as this election has proven once again, it is really hard to unseat an incumbent that is running, especially in the modern era. Once you are in, you have to really mess up for people to want to get rid of you. Let's take a look at the last 100 years:
Taft - Lost because his party was split by Roosevelt.
Hoover - Lost because he failed to ease the Depression and stood by his moral beliefs in volunteerism versus having the government run a deficit to help.
Carter - Was perceived as weak due to the hostage crisis. Oversaw the first energy crisis, and after calling it a malaise fired his whole cabinet. This does not inspire confidence. A recession and inflation hit right when he runs for reelection. Is undermined by his own party in a primary battle.
George H. W. Bush - Should have won reelection, but also had a recession on his reelection year. He also pissed off a lot of Republicans by breaking his pledge of no new taxes.
Out of the 18 presidents we have had since 1900, only 4 have been defeated in reelection attempts. And the main reason is because the economy tanked on their watch. It is surprising that Obama is doing so well today. I would attribute that mainly due to the public still blaming Bush for what happen. Another part of it is that we live in a more partisan time, and Obama has a higher floor of support than previous presidents. It also helps that, unlike Carter and George H. W. Bush, he isn't running against a talented politician. So it is never a good idea to bet against a sitting president winning reelection. People are willing to accept the devil they know versus the one they don't.
But as this election has proven once again, it is really hard to unseat an incumbent that is running, especially in the modern era. Once you are in, you have to really mess up for people to want to get rid of you. Let's take a look at the last 100 years:
Taft - Lost because his party was split by Roosevelt.
Hoover - Lost because he failed to ease the Depression and stood by his moral beliefs in volunteerism versus having the government run a deficit to help.
Carter - Was perceived as weak due to the hostage crisis. Oversaw the first energy crisis, and after calling it a malaise fired his whole cabinet. This does not inspire confidence. A recession and inflation hit right when he runs for reelection. Is undermined by his own party in a primary battle.
George H. W. Bush - Should have won reelection, but also had a recession on his reelection year. He also pissed off a lot of Republicans by breaking his pledge of no new taxes.
Out of the 18 presidents we have had since 1900, only 4 have been defeated in reelection attempts. And the main reason is because the economy tanked on their watch. It is surprising that Obama is doing so well today. I would attribute that mainly due to the public still blaming Bush for what happen. Another part of it is that we live in a more partisan time, and Obama has a higher floor of support than previous presidents. It also helps that, unlike Carter and George H. W. Bush, he isn't running against a talented politician. So it is never a good idea to bet against a sitting president winning reelection. People are willing to accept the devil they know versus the one they don't.
http://www.politico.com/blogs/charlie-mahtesian/2012/09/webb-drops-the-hammer-on-romney-136858.html
Does anyone have video of this? Damn...
Does anyone have video of this? Damn...
http://www.centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/
Larry Sabato has Obama at 290 EV for now. Senate looking good too. Let's hope it holds up..
Larry Sabato has Obama at 290 EV for now. Senate looking good too. Let's hope it holds up..
Aaron Strife
Banned
Romney only wins by not losing - that is, he doesn't screw up enough to produce negative poll results.
I highly doubt we're going to see some new model of Romney that's an excellent debater, immensely personable and running on platform that doesn't suck.
Only an outside event can beat Obama. The trouble is there's now less than 40 days for that outside event to occur.
I highly doubt we're going to see some new model of Romney that's an excellent debater, immensely personable and running on platform that doesn't suck.
Only an outside event can beat Obama. The trouble is there's now less than 40 days for that outside event to occur.
It's quite sad that he would just barely beat an opponent as weak as Romney. Romney is so weak he lost to McCain in 2008.
Romney only did well in the primary debates when he did three things:
1. Stand there not looking like a maniac on a stage full of maniacs.
2. Give a prepared one-liner without fumbling the delivery.
3. Outflank his opponents by going further right than them.
Now, in a debate with only two participants, just standing there not looking like a maniac doesn't accomplish much. The one-linera might stick but it won't humanize him to attack the President and that's really what he needs right now. Lastly, going right in the general is a bad move given where he already stands with the electorate.
That said, he will be the "winner" of the first debate.
1. Stand there not looking like a maniac on a stage full of maniacs.
2. Give a prepared one-liner without fumbling the delivery.
3. Outflank his opponents by going further right than them.
Now, in a debate with only two participants, just standing there not looking like a maniac doesn't accomplish much. The one-linera might stick but it won't humanize him to attack the President and that's really what he needs right now. Lastly, going right in the general is a bad move given where he already stands with the electorate.
That said, he will be the "winner" of the first debate.
PhoenixDark
Banned
Romney destroyed Gingrich in the pivotal debate after SC, when he needed it the most. Granted Gingrich is not Obama, but Gingrich is certainly a formidable debater. Some might argue Gingrich was hurt by the crowd that night, which wasn't allowed to participate/cheer, but overall Romney came out aggressive and effectively boxed him in.
No one expects Obama to bomb. But just as a boxer behind on points is perfectly capable of knocking out a better opponent, Romney could be dangerous. Debates are often remembered for one moment; that makes things quite unpredictable so I don't think it's logical to assume Obama will simply stomp Romney.
Romney's problem is that he'll have to talk about the 47% comment, and will look like a fool during a health care debate. To make matters worse Obama or the moderators might ask him how he differs from Bush.
TacticalFox88
Banned
Of course this all assumes Obama doesn't go HAM on his ass. Romney pretty much insulted his upbringing, both indirectly and directly. I'd imagine that didn't go over well with him, inwardly.
Aaron Strife
Banned
Sabato's map has FL, NH, and CO as tossup states, and NC inexplicably Lean Romney.
The broader takeaway is that Obama could lose all the tossups and still win - and he's leading in all the tossup states anyway.
Sabato is being very conservative compared to the 538 and similar sites. (Electoral-Vote.com and election.princeton.edu) They've had Obama over 270 for months. The gambling sites have had Obama winning all along
I disagree. Romney's bar is way higher than Obama's. Right now the narrative is that Romney's campaign is practically a dead carcass on the side of the road, and it would take a miracle to revive it. The narrative that the media will most assuredly go to after the debate is, "Was that enough to get the Romney campaign in contention again? Was that enough to shake things up and move the electorate? Can he win because of that debate?"
As someone pointed out before the only thing the media loves more than a comeback is a train wreck. This campaign is a train wreck right now, and only a miracle can pull it out. If the media can't plausibly play the comeback angle, because he doesn't do something just stunning, then they're going to keep playing the train wreck angle.
And no amount of training should make you confident that Romney might be able to pull this off decisively, because the past has no hints toward that. Look at the RNC. They had plenty of time to prepare for that. That was the time when this party and this campaign could make the best possible push for their candidate. They had a week where the message was 100% theirs. Everything was in their favor for it, and look what happened. All they really had to do was make Romney look like a plausible alternative and run a good convention, and they screwed that up. Badly. They based most of it on an out of context quote and then capped the thing off with a wild out-of-their-ass idea of putting Clint Eastwood up there during prime time.
They can't even keep Romney on message at all. What makes you think he'll have one stroke of genius night where not only does he keep a straight message but Obama doesn't even call him on any of the previous messages? It isn't like Obama isn't paying attention to all this stuff. He knows what Romney's been doing and saying this whole time. He knows pretty much every possible thing Romney can say, because he's said it. There isn't some magic rabbit he can pull out of his ass to save him. I mean sure it's gotta be a bit frustrating for Obama since Romney does have so many messages he has to prepare different retorts for freaking everything, but still...
Also, Obama's been living and breathing this stuff for 4 years. Romney's just trying to be president, but Obama already is. Every single subject they can touch on Obama has already probably thought about it and possibly tried to do something about it during his years. He knows all the facts about most of the things Romney can attack him on, because he lived it. He was there. And really, all he has to do is keep looking presidential and not fuck up, and the narrative is already on his side.
All this is not to say that Obama will win or whatever. Really I think it'll be pretty divisive. I think each side will think their guy won and the narrative mostly continues. Romney will likely change his narrative from "He's dead" to possibly "Ok, well he's limbing, but I suppose he's not dead."
Dr. Pangloss
Member
Also, I think Obama is going to be very conservative in the debates. He is not going to stick his neck out. He'll just do average because he is ahead in the polls and doesn't really need to do anything.
- Status